DIGEST FOR PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS 

Exceptions to the Rule of Prospectivity. (See page 12 of Albano.)

CASE: PEOPLE v. PIMENTEL

288 SCRA 542 (1998)

Facts:

In 1983, private respondent Antonio Tujan was charged with subversion under RA 1700 (Anti-
Subversion Law). As a consequence thereof, a warrant for his arrest has been issued on July 29,
1983—but it could not be served because he could not be found.

7 years later (June 5, 1990), he was arrested on the basis of his warrant of arrest of the
subversion case. When arrested, an unlicensed .38 caliber special revolver and six rounds of live
ammunition were found on his possession.

On June 14, 1990, he was charged with illegal possession of firearms and ammunition in
furtherance of subversion under PD 1866.

On July 16 1990, Tujan filed the motion to quash the second criminal case (illegal possession…)
contending that common crimes such as illegal possession of firearms and ammunition should
actually be deemed absorbed by the crime subversion. He is entitled to invoke constitutional
protection against double jeopardy (Art. III, Constitution; Misolas v. Panga; and Enrile v.
Salazar: alleged possession absorbed in subversion. It was granted by the trial court and the court
of appeals.)

SIDE ISSUE:

Issue: Whether or not the charge under PD 1866 be quashed on ground of double jeopardy in
view of the previous charge under RA 1700?

Ratio: NO.

WHY?
1. Article III of the Constitution and Rule 117 Revised Rules of Court state that for
double jeopardy to occur, acquittal, conviction or dismissal in previous cases must have
occurred. In this case, first case was not even arraigned yet.
2. They are different offenses. R.A. 1700 punishes subversion while PD 1866 punishes
illegal possession of firearms.

Anyway, let us go back to our concern which is the application of EXECEPTION TO THE RULE
OF PROSPECTIVITY

Since RA 7636 totally repealed subversion or RA 1700, and since this is favorable to the
accused, we can no longer charge accused with RA 1700 even if the issue wasn’t raised. PD
1866 should be amended to mere ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF FIREARMS without
furtherance of subversion.

Ruling:
1. The subversion charged against Antonion Tujan is DISMISSED (RA 76736 =
Subversion is no longer a crime. - retroactive effect)
2. The other information for the illegal possession of firearms and ammunition in
furtherance of subversion is DEEMED AMENDED to SIMPLE illegal possession
of firearms and ammunition. The accused-appellant is hereby ordered RELEASED
IMMEDIATELY (this is so because even if he was convicted of I.P.o.F.A.a.A.
–hehe—the length of his detention while his case is still pending has ALREADY
EXCEEDED the penalty prescribed by the new law.)

In short:

“Held: RTC and CA reversed and set aside. RA 1700 charge

dismissed. PD 1866 change amended. Release Tujan.”

That’s all. Case Closed. I hope this isn’t too long. 